Democracy's Good Name: The Rise and Risks of the World's Most Popular Form of Government [Hardcover]

Michael Mandelbaum (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 1586485148 | ISBN-13: 978-1586485146 | Publication Date: August 14, 2007

The last thirty years have witnessed one of the most remarkable developments in history: the rapid rise of democracy around the world. In 1900, only ten countries were democracies and by 1975 there were only 30. Today, 119 of the world’s 190 countries have adopted this form of government, and it is by far the most celebrated and prestigious one.

How did democracy acquire its good name? Why did it spread so far and so fast? Why do important countries remain undemocratic? And why do efforts to export democracy so often fail and even make conditions worse?

In Democracy’s Good Name, Michael Mandelbaum, one of America’s leading foreign policy thinkers, answers these questions. He surveys the methods and risks of promoting democracy, and analyzes the prospects for the establishment of democratic governments in Russia, China, and the Arab world.

Written in Mandelbaum’s clear and accessible style, Democracy’s Good Name presents a lucid, comprehensive, and surprising account of the history and future of democracy from the American Revolution to the occupation of Iraq.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Democracy, until recently, was an anomaly in a landscape of monarchies, dictatorships and empires; its critics—including America's founding fathers—associated it with mob rule and demagogic tyranny. In this engaging treatise, Mandelbaum (The Ideas That Conquered the World) explains how the modern democratic fusion of popular sovereignty—i.e., majority rule—with individual liberty came to dominate the world's polities. His first reason is straightforward: democracy works. Democratic nations, he notes, especially the flagship democracies of Britain and the U.S., are wealthier, stronger and more stable and inspire other countries to emulate them. His second, more provocative explanation, is that the modern spread of free markets provides a school for democracy by establishing private property (the fundamental liberty), respect for law, civil society, organized economic interests as the forerunners of political parties, and the habit of settling differences by negotiation and compromise rather than violence. Mandelbaum's market rhetoric—he calls democracy the leading brand of political system among knowledgeable political consumers—can be a bit simpleminded. But readers will find a lucid, accessible blend of history, political science and sociology, with a wealth of fresh insights into the making of the contemporary world. (Aug.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Review

"Mandelbaum argues....spreading democracy is as much a matter of culture as it is of politics." -- Newsday.com, March 2, 2007

"[An] excellent and broadly accessible new book." -- The Weekly Standard, October 22, 2007

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 336 pages
• Publisher: PublicAffairs (August 14, 2007)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1586485148
• ISBN-13: 978-1586485146
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (11 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,567,330 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Michael Mandelbaum is the Christian A. Herter Professor of American Foreign Policy at The Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, D.C. and is the director of the American Foreign Policy Program there. He has also held teaching posts at Harvard and Columbia Universities, and at the United States Naval Academy.

His most recent book, written with co-author Thomas L. Friedman, is THAT USED TO BE US: HOW AMERICA FELL BEHIND IN THE WORLD IT INVENTED AND HOW WE CAN COME BACK. Its publication date is September 5, 2011.

He serves on the board of advisors of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Washington-based organization sponsoring research and public discussion on American policy toward the Middle East.

A graduate of Yale College, Professor Mandelbaum earned his Master's degree at King's College, Cambridge University and his doctorate at Harvard University.

Professor Mandelbaum is the author or co-author of numerous articles and of 13 books: That Used To Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back (2011) with co-author Thomas L. Friedman; The Frugal Superpower: America's Global Leadership in a Cash-Strapped Era (2010); Democracy's Good Name: The Rise and Risks of the World's Most Popular Form of Government (2007); The Case For Goliath: How America Acts As The World's Government in the Twenty-first Century (2006); The Meaning of Sports: Why Americans Watch Baseball, Football and Basketball and What They See When They Do (2004); The Ideas That Conquered the World: Peace, Democracy and Free Markets in the Twenty-First Century (2002); The Dawn of Peace in Europe (1996); The Fate of Nations: The Search for National Security in the 19th and 20th Centuries (1988); The Global Rivals, (co-author, 1988); Reagan and Gorbachev (co-author, 1987); The Nuclear Future (1983); The Nuclear Revolution: International Politics Before and After Hiroshima (1981); and The Nuclear Question: The United States and Nuclear Weapons, 1946-1976 (1979). He is also the editor of twelve books.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

19 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Readable, authoritative and eminently persuasive, August 21, 2007

By 

Dennis Littrell (SoCal) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (COMMUNITY FORUM 04)    (HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Democracy's Good Name: The Rise and Risks of the World's Most Popular Form of Government (Hardcover)

What surprised me in reading this very well written treatise on democracy was the fact that democracy is now the most common form of government in the world, and that has been a fact for only the last two or three decades. Prior to say the 1970s democratic governments were not only in the minority worldwide, but were seen by many as something of an experiment. After all, until the rise of Great Britain in 18th century, there were no nation-state democracies on the planet. Britain was first and the US was the second. Professor Mandelbaum explains all this and more in a most engaging manner.

The problem has always been that democracy, far from having a "good name," was considered dangerous to liberty and private property. It was believed that if you allowed popular sovereignty, you were on the road to disaster since the majority would take resources from minorities and stifle opinions that the majority found disagreeable. But, as Mandelbaum is careful and anxious to note, if you add liberty to popular sovereignty you have the magic formula that leads to relative wealth and happiness, or at least the opportunity for same. Consequently what Mandelbaum calls democracy is really a hybrid of popular sovereignty and liberty. He shows how they go together like love and marriage.

The book begins with the origins of democracy and ends with the future of democracy. Along the way Mandelbaum makes the case for democracies being more conducive to the creation of wealth and more peaceful than other forms of government; indeed he claims that no democratic state has ever attacked another democratic state. That is eye-opening. He also argues that a prerequisite for democracy is a market economy. He argues further that a market economy, because it is based on economic liberty, tends to lead toward political freedom and democracy. However, as is presently the case in China, a free market economy may exist without political freedom, but for how long?

In the last chapter Mandelbaum looks at prospects for real democracy in Russia, China and the Arab states. He concludes that Russia is the closest to achieving it, but must overcome the habits of 70-some years of communist rule and before that the undemocratic mind set of the czarist state. He sees China as coming along more slowly because the communists are still firmly intrenched and he doesn't see them giving up power any time soon. In the Arab/Muslim Middle East the situation is more difficult. Mandelbaum notes that the autocratic states there will have to overcome not only a disinclination to follow Western ways, but the tenets of Islam itself which argue against democracy. Furthermore, petro states are very far from having either true market economies or the requisite institutions of civil society that foster popular sovereignty and liberty. As for the future of democracy in the democracies themselves, Mandelbaum sees that as rosy. Only a major catastrophe of some sort is likely to change the leading democracies in Europe, the US and Japan into something else.

I found it interesting that Mandelbaum is careful not to directly criticize Bush's misadventure in Iraq while at the same time giving very substantial reasons for the foregone conclusion that attempts to impose democracy there from without would fail. Natan Sharansky, a cabinet member in the Israeli government, has argued that a good way to fight terrorism is to turn tyrannical states into democracies. Mandelbaum agrees but notes how very difficult that is to do. He writes (pp. 171-172) that Sharansky's ideas influenced George W. Bush in his attempt to turn Iraq into the first Arab/Muslim democracy. Mandelbaum also quotes Ronald Reagan, who said "Freedom and democracy are the best guarantors of peace. History has shown that democratic nations do not start wars." (p. 137) I could not help but see this quote, placed conspicuously at the beginning of Chapter 4, as a direct stab at the policies of our current president.

But Mandelbaum is scrupulous in his avoidance of any direct criticism of the Bush administration and careful not to endorse any political platform. Indeed one of the strengths of this book is its nonpartisan tone and the fact that its political agenda does not extend beyond an enthusiastic three cheers for democracy.

For those wanting to know more about what democracy is, how it comes into being, how and why it has become "the world's most popular form of government," and what its prospects are, this book is about as good as anything I can imagine. It is authoritative, readable and masterfully argued. This is a fine piece of work by an outstanding political scientist.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Democracy's Required Reading, October 6, 2007

By 

Geopolitico "Geo" (Houston, Texas) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Democracy's Good Name: The Rise and Risks of the World's Most Popular Form of Government (Hardcover)

Dr. Mandelbaum's highly readable and stunningly insightful review of the origins of democracy, how countries become democracies, and the future of democracy is feat of unparalleled analytic skill. This outstanding work should be required reading for all candidates seeking national office in any country, as well as anyone dealing with or interested in international affairs, and all who wish to comprehend or already cherish democratic freedom.

Professor Mandelbaum is masterful in providing the reader with a clear, concise and wholly enjoyable history of democracy while explaining the interrelationship of democracy with free markets, international trade and how democracy determines whether we live in a world at war or we have peace. After reading this fine book one not only feels more optimistic about the future but you are well educated with an understanding of the basis for such optimism. Perhaps of equal importance, this book explains the risks to existing democracies and the factors that will determine whether democracy thrives or withers around the globe. The insights regarding Russia, China and the Arab world help explain the situation in those areas today and the potential outcomes for them in the future.

This is a fact filled book written is a highly entertaining style that ties together a multitude of issues. For anyone interested in the future of our world this is a book you must read at least once (it is so interesting and such a pleasure to read that I am now reading it a second time).

4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Some good conclusions, poor arguments though with major fallacies., November 23, 2008

By 

Newton Ooi (Phoenix, Arizona United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Democracy's Good Name: The Rise and Risks of the World's Most Popular Form of Government (Paperback)

This book argues several inter-related points. First, democracy is the best type of government there is in terms of safeguarding lives and property, and producing a high, and continuously improving standard of living. Second, democracy as a form of government does not come naturally to all people in all situations, but is often spread thru imperfect imitation of one nation by another nation. Third, the US and UK are the world's exemplars of democracy in terms of role-modeling the practice of it, and convincing other nations to adopt it.

I agree completely with the author's first point. A tabulation of the relative standards of living in different parts of the world usually shows the highest standards of living occur in areas with the most-democratic regimes. This conclusion is applicable whether one takes the snapshot in 2000 AD, 1000 AD, or 1000 BC. The author argues that this correlation between wealth and democracy is due to the principles of the free market (exchange of goods and ideas, private property, etc...) that are needed to generate the former, also happen to instigate the latter. This might be correct, but the author misses a potentially bigger reason; and that is democracy offers a fair and practical method of choosing political leaders. All other methods of choosing leaders often end up as civil wars, revolutions or coups; and nothing destroys wealth better than violence. Hence the direct correlation between democracy and wealth is not necessarily via the free market and private property. Instead, it is because democracy provides a path around violent, wealth-destroying, succession struggles.

I disagree with the author's 2nd point, which is democracy does not come naturally. Studies of primitive societies throughout the world, such as the Native Americans of North America, consistently demonstrate that direct democracy was the prevalent form of government prior to European colonization. However, this democracy was usually practiced orally. For example, written documents from early explorers and missionaries describe how a given tribe of several hundred members would often discuss an issue (i.e. whether or not to war with a neighboring tribe) at great lengths that involved every adult member. Discussions happened face-to-face and hence decision-making was devoid of pamphlets, TV commercials, billboards, radio-ads and other manifestations of propaganda that is all too common in representative democracies. This is where the author either ignores or is oblivious to the truth. Direct democracy was actually a very prevalent form of government. Societies that practiced it were gradually wiped out, absorbed or marginalized by colonial extension of European monarchies. The latter (colonies and home nations) in turn evolved into representative democracies, often in fits and starts.

I believe the author's last conclusion is blatantly wrong and shows an incomplete understanding of 20th century history. The US and UK are not the world's best examples of democracy. The UK still has a taxpayer-funded monarchy that happens to own some of the most valuable real-estate in that nation. Likewise, the US has consistently maintained the highest incarceration rate among all democracies over the past 20 - 30 years. Even if one were to attribute both characteristics to voters' choices in each respective country, this still ignores one highly undemocratic feature in each country. For the UK, it is the relations between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Currently they are peaceful, but going back just 30 years saw routine violence between England and Northern Ireland over sovereignty that stretched back centuries.

For the US, it is the high amount of inconsistencies in voting results at all levels. Whether it be the registering of dead people, voter intimidation, destruction of uncounted ballets, forgery of votes, and outright miscounting, the American system of holding elections and tallying votes is probably the most error-prone in the industrialized world. Forget about the 2000 presidential election and Florida. One can look at LBJ's political rise as documented in Robert Caro's multi-volume biography. Or look across the political aisle at Nixon and Watergate; notice the scandal came out AFTER he got elected to a 2nd term. Probably the best testament to my point is the constant recounts of elections. Whether it is the 2008 Congressional elections or previous Congressional elections, one can find numerous races that took 2 or more recounts to decide, often with a different winner declared after each recount.

I think a better set of candidates for the world's role models of democracy would be the Scandinavian countries. From Iceland in the West to Finland in the East, the Scandinavian countries have lower incarceration rates, stronger protection of civil liberties, provide higher rates of public financing of civil institutions necessary for democracy such as schools, courts, and social welfare programs. The Scandinavian countries also do a much better job of separating commercial interests and government pressure from influencing the mass media. This last point is poignantly demonstrated by the passive complicity in which the American media (Fox News, MSNBC, Wall Street Journal, Time, etc...) believed the Bush Administrations lies about Iraq's WMD. Probably the best example of Scandinavia's leadership among democracies is their strong support for diplomacy, human rights, and open borders for political refugees.

Another miss by the author is the contribution by entities residing in democracies to the creation and maintenance of dictatorships (heredity or idealogical) in other countries. Again the best examples are the UK and US. The Saudi dynasty on the Arabian peninsula was created and rests on American power; see the novel Cities of Salt for evidence. Likewise the Nazis' rise to power was financially supported by US banks and corporations such as Ford, GM, IBM, and Standard Oil.

My final criticism of the book is the numerous fallacies in the text. Probably the most relevant example is the author's discussion of terrorism and democracy, and the author's specific statement that established democracies like the US and UK do not support terrorism. I guess if one were to narrowly define terrorism as the smashing of planes into buildings, then the author is correct. There is no evidence that the US and UK have ever supported the smashing of planes into crowded buildings. However, if one were to use the conventional definition of terrorism, i.e. the use of violence against civilians to achieve political goals, the author's statement is flat out wrong. Both the US and UK have actively supported terrorists and terrorism throughout the 20th century. Lets leave aside the UK for now and focus on the US, seeing that the author and I are both American. Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, the executive branch of the US government has provided money, weapons and training to thousands of violent bullies in Latin America as long as the latter professed anti-communism. Many of them used their wealth and weaponry to terrorize civilians through torture, rape, kidnappings and murder. Former Panamanian leader Manual Noriega is a good example. Trained in Fort Benning, Georgia, the US then released him onto the people of Panama whereupon he bullied them for over a decade until he sided with the wrong drug dealer, and imposed the wrath of President G. Bush. Another good example is the Afghan war of the 1980's. Call them freedom fighters then, but the tactics they used were hallmarks of terrorism. Many of them eventually made their way into urban capitals worldwide and became terrorists by anyone's definition.

So overall, this book has a lot of mistakes in it. There are better works to read to understand the spread and success of democracy in the latter decades of the 20th century.